Biological filtration with and without prior in-line coagulation to reduce UF fouling by secondary effluent
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The objectives of this research were to investigate biofiltration prior to ultrafiltration (UF) for treatment of secondary effluent. Biofiltration with and without prior in-line coagulation was assessed for UF membrane fouling reduction. Two parallel pilot-scale biofilters, each with different media (sand vs. anthracite), were operated under identical conditions at a hydraulic loading rate of 0.75 m/h. A component of this investigation included the in-line application of a 1.0 mg/L dose of ferric sulfate prior to an anthracite biofilter. All UF membrane fouling experiments were conducted at bench-scale at a constant flux of 32 L/m2h (LMH). The sand (BF1) and anthracite biofilters (BF2) removed on average 25 and 20%, respectively, of the biopolymer fraction of the effluent organic matter. Humic substances were less well removed at about 10%, while biofilter influent turbidity was reduced by 75 and 70% through BF1 and BF2, respectively. Feeding the UF membrane with biofilter effluent (no prior coagulant addition) substantially reduced both hydraulically reversible and irreversible membrane fouling by up to 60 and 80%, respectively. Hydraulically reversible and irreversible fouling were further reduced (up to 69 and 87%, respectively) by the integration of the in-line coagulation/biofiltration pre-treatment processes compared to biofiltration alone.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".